Version Date 21 Nov 2014
Programme/Project Evaluation
Terms of Reference
1.Background
Programme Title: Haïti Hurricane Matthew Emergency ResponseBackground to the Programme
On Tuesday October 4th 2016, Hurricane Matthew landed on the southern peninsula of Haïti. Hurricane Matthew was the first Category 4 hurricane to landfall the country in 52 years.[1] The hurricane moved slowly off the southern peninsula coast, depositing a heavy rains. The hurricane's eye then took a 90o turn moving directly over the eastern tip of the peninsular. Consequently, serious damage was caused to Sud and Grand’Anse Departments. However, significant damage was also caused in Nippes, Nord-Ouest, Artibonite and Ouest[2]. Affected areas sustained winds, storm surges, heavy rains and extensive flooding, which resulted in hundreds of deaths[3], displacement and extensive damage to crops, livestock, livelihoods, shelter (churches, homes, hospitals schools) roads and infrastructure.
Path of Hurricane Matthew[4]
2.1 million people were affected, and 1.4 million were in need of humanitarian assistance[5]. 806,000 people were in need of urgent food and 141,493 people were displaced to temporary shelters. 894,000 children were affected, 116,000 of whom had their education disrupted[6].
Before Hurricane Matthew, Haïti was recovering from a cholera epidemic, migration from the Dominican Republic, and many people had not fully recovered from the 2010 earthquake[7].
Food production was particularly badly affected. Before Hurricane Matthew, there had been three years of El-Niño-induced drought, resulting in 47.5% of families in drought areas affected by food insecurity[8]. Additionally, Hurricane Matthew occurred just before the 2016 harvest for yam, black beans and bananas[9], escalating food insecurity.
In some departments, 80-90% of the harvest was destroyed by Matthew[10]. Not only had they lost their crops, but also livestock, equipment and seeds stock. The three most affected departments (Grand’Anse, Sud and Nippes) were also the breadbasket of Haïti, normally producing 85% of the country’s corn, rice, sorghum, peas and beans and almost 40% fruit[11].
Consequently, because this area was so reliant on agriculture for food and livelihoods, and the cost of food increased, 6 months after Matthew, a consortium of NGOs raised an alert advocating to address these urgent food insecurity needs.
Shelter was also severely affected. 370,000 homes were impacted by Matthew (30,180 destroyed and 60,000 damaged). Of these, 84,000 were in urban areas, but 286,000 were in rural areas, because they are built of traditional materials (timber, thatch and mud).[12]
Haïti’s high disaster risk profile is due, not only to its exposure to a number of hazards, but more importantly, its vulnerability to these hazards. Its vulnerability is aggravated by food insecurity, inequality, corruption, low income and lack of access to finance. Consequently, these disasters have weakened the response capacity and resilience of communities.
Hurricane Irma
In early July 2017, Hurricane Irma (a category 5 hurricane) travelled through the caribbean inflicted devastating damage on some islands. On 7th July 2017, it passed by the north of Haïti. Fortunately it moved far enough north to cause only minimal damage to Haïti and Tearfund’s partners’ response was minimal.
Path of Hurricane Irma[13]
Tearfund launched a public appeal shortly after the 4th October and by November, had raised £1,153, 816. An additional £72,452 was raised over the following months. After Hurricane Irma, £13,718 was raised. In total, £1,239,987 was raised from supporters.
In addition, we received £118,825.37 via Partnerships and £54,268.03 from Tear NL.
List of previous and related reports, evaluations, key documents etc.
●Haïti Country Strategy
●Response Strategy: Haïti Hurricane Matthew
●GMIS
●Haïti Hurricane Matthew Appeal October 2016
Partner profile and history/Operational Programme
Tearfund has supported development work in Haïti from our UK Headquarters office for over 30 years through a portfolio of local and international partner organizations. Before Hurricane Matthew, Tearfund had conducted/established the following activities:
●Developed a Tearfund disaster contingency plans
●Established the RIHPED (Réseau Intégral Haïtien pour le Plaidoyer et l’Environnement Durable) Network, made up of 13 organisations, including Integral Alliance Members and Tearfund partners, with the aim of increasing local capacity to respond to disasters and reduce disaster risk (DRR). As part of this initiative, an emergency FRERE (Fond de Réponse Rapide et Efficiente) Fund was established for immediate use in the event of a disaster. Prior to the hurricane, the FRERE Fund totalled $90,000, of which Tearfund had contributed close to 90%. The FRERE Fund was managed by WCH.
Is this response, Tearfund responded via partners, Integral Alliance members and RIHPED.
Partners registered as INGOs (also member of Integral Alliance and RIHPED):
●World Concern Haïti (WCH)
●World Relief (WR)
Partners registered as Local NGOs (also members of RIHEP):
●Conciles Des Eglises Evangéliques D’Haïti (CEEH)
●Fédération des Écoles Protestantes d’Haïti (FEPH)
●Fondasyon Chanje Lavi (FCL)
Members of RIHPED
●Fondasyon Kominote Kretyen an Aksyon (FOKA)
●Fondation Haïtienne de l’Enseignement Privé (FONHEP)
●Living Water
●Medical Teams International (MTI)
●Micah Challenge
●Union Evangélique Baptiste d’Haïti (UEBH)
Their affiliations can clearly be seen in Partner Mapping - Haïti
Current and planned activities
As Haïti is one of Tearfund’s disaster priority countries, disaster risk management is one of the focus areas of the country strategy. Intentionally deciding to promote the ‘localisation of aid’, actioned by the establishing of RIHPED and the FRERE Fund and contingency planning with local partners, it was decided, not to respond operationally, but exclusively via partners.
Responses were bound by the following parameters:
- The response will be for 18 months from Oct 2016 to Mar 2018, and will comprise a six week emergency response phase, a 4 month early recovery phase, and a 12 month longer recovery phase.
- Tearfund will respond through current partners and may add emergency partners depending on gaps and needs that are identified.
- Tearfund will work in areas most affected by the hurricane, particularly Grand’Anse, Sud, Nippes and Sud-Est[14]. Whilst most of our current partners already work in some of these areas, some partners will extend to new areas in order to respond to the greatest needs.
- Tearfund’s response will be implemented according to Tearfund's Emergency Response Procedures and Quality Standards. Projects will be designed and screened to ensure they do no harm and take account of the need to protect children and women from violence.
In response to the needs identified above, our response in Haïti will address urgent basic needs, recovery, and the building of resilience. The sectoral focus areas will be shelter, livelihoods, and food security.
The method for addressing immediate needs during the emergency phase will be an Assess and Assist approach. The advantage of this approach is that a) it enables a compassionate response to meet urgent and obvious needs and b) it promotes acceptance by the communities to enable proper assessments to be carried out.
The focus of the early recovery phase will be on enabling re-planting of crops during the Nov and Dec planting season, and on promoting building back better of homes and community buildings.
The longer term recovery phase will continue to promote hurricane and earthquake resistant building techniques, as well as engaging in advocacy, improving contingency planning, and providing training in disaster preparedness and response for churches and communities.
RIHPED distributed grants of $5,000 (plus one £10,000 to WCH), totalling £55,000, of the £90,000 in the FRERE Fund to members to provide rapid assistance (cash, NFIs, food and hygiene kits). Larger grants were made to CEEH, FEPH, WCH and WR. RIHPED members drafted emergency proposals, which were vetted by WCH and Tearfund. Upon approval, WCH disbursed the money, via cheque, to each organisation.
An ‘Assist and Assess’ approach was used to gain acceptance and address immediate needs. Below is a summary of the different phase activities implemented by partners and RIHPED members.
Relief Phase - 5th October 2016 to 16th November 2016
Partner / Project No. / Source of Funds / Grant ($) / Location (Department) / Project Summary / No.[15] Direct Beneficiaries
World Concern / HAI212 / FRERE / 10,000 / Sud-Est / Assess and Assist -Food, hygiene kits, water filters and tarpaulins to 3,150 HHs (IMASS Project)[16] / 443
World Concern / HAI232 / Tearfund / 75,000 / Sud-Est / Assess and Assist - Cash distribution of HTG[17] 3,000 to 500 HHs / 2,308
World Relief / HAI212 / FRERE / 5,000 / Sud, Sud-Est / Assess and Assist - Food and hygiene kits to 1,470 HHs / 7,315
HAI235 / Tearfund / 24,000
Living Water / HAI212 / FRERE / 5,000 / West / Assess and Assist - food kits to 100 HHs, water purification kits to 2,000 HHs, cholera prevention awareness training / 9,267
MTI / HAI212 / FRERE / 5,000 / Sud / No assist. Needs assessments in 3 communes in Sud Department / 0
Micah / HAI212 / FRERE / 5,000 / Nippes / Assess and Assist - Cash distribution of HTG 2,000 to 125 HHs / 625
CEEH / HAI212 / FRERE / 5,000 / Grand’Anse, Nippes / Assess and Assist - Cash distribution to 424 HHs (HTG 1,500 to 300 HHs; HTG 2,000 to 84 HHs; HTG 250 to 40 HHs) / 27,111
HAI233 / Tearfund / 8,938.62
FEPH / HAI212 / FRERE / 3,346.17 / Grand’Anse, Sud / Assess and Assist - Cash distribution of HTG 2,000 to 100 HHs / 500
HAI225 / FRERE / 1,653.83
HAI234 / Tearfund / 6,366.07
UEBH / HAI225 / FRERE / 5,000 / North-West, Artibonit, Ouest / Assess and Assist-Cash distribution of HTG 2,000 to 7 HHs, 2.5kg seeds to 287 HHs / 1,470
FOKA / HAI225 / FRERE / 5,000 / West / Assess and Assist - Cash distribution HTG 2,000 to 110 HHs / 440
FONHEP / HAI225 / FRERE / 5,000 / Sud, Sud-Est / Assess and Assist - Cash distribution of HTG 1,500 to 48 HHs, 15 tables for 5 schools & 3 tables for school community / 240
Early Recovery Phase - 1st November 2016 to 31st March 2017
Partner / Project No. / Source of Funds / Grant ($) / Location (Department) / Project Summary / No.[18] Direct Beneficiaries
World Relief / HAI236 / Tearfund / 37,476 / Sud, Grand’Anse, Nippes / Mobilize and equip local churches within WR’ Church Empowerment Zone to respond to shelter, health and agriculture needs.
Shelter: 92, Livestock: 428, Cash: 588, WASH (hygiene kits): 1,285, DRR training: 277; Food: 277 (741 beneficiaries received hygiene kits, DRR training and food) / 2,393
CEEH / HAI238 / Tearfund / 57,679.70 / Grand’Anse / Recovery of Agricultural Production. Increase food security and income for 500 Households / 3,000
World Relief / HAI239 / Tearfund / 107,778.50 / Sud, Sud-Est, Grand’Anse / Food Security / 30,000
CEEH / HAI240 / Tearfund / 79,128.62 / Nippes / 125% increase in food security for 500
1. On average, HHs reached 84.5% relative to the normal yield
2. HHs reached 100% of their normal food consumption / 2,065
CEEH / HAI242 / Tearfund / 145,199.90 / Grand’Anse
Longer Term Recovery Phase - 1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018
Partner / Project No. / Source of Funds / Grant ($) / Location (Department) / Project Summary / No.[19] Direct Beneficiaries
FEPH / HAI243 / Tearfund / 189,241.48 / Grand’Anse / Cash payments for 7,500 beneficiaries to address emergency food insecurity / 7,500
World Concern / HAI1244-0 / Tearfund / 65,000 / Sud / Support 80 households self recovery of strong and safe housing solutions in Torbeck Commune using anti-cyclonic construction standards.
World Concern / HAI244-1 / Tearfund / 20,000 / Sud / Support 15 households self recovery of strong and safe housing solutions in Torbeck Commune using anti-cyclonic construction standards.
Hurricane Irma Response
Partner / Project No. / Source of Funds / Grant ($) / Location (Department) / Project Summary / No.[20] Direct Beneficiaries
FCL / HAI225 / Tearfund / North West / Hurricane Irma / 821
CEEH / HAI2-- / Tearfund / 7,840 / North West / Hurricane Irma / 1,000
World Concern / HAI246 / Tearfund / 20,000 / North West / Hurricane Irma / 850
Requirement and audience for the evaluation report (internal, external, donor etc)
The audience for this review:
●Tearfund Haïti country office and LAC team, with an emphasis on improvements and effectiveness
●International Group, with reference on learning lessons for future disasters
●Partners and Integral Alliance members
Scope of the evaluation (accountability and/or learning purposes)
This review will be used primarily by the LAC Team to inform future planning and prioritise future programming. It is suggested that it is also available to partners as appropriate. It will also be useful for learning in future emergency response situations and shared in an IG Learning Session, and the report made available to those interested and added to the evaluations database.
2.Purpose
Evaluation Goal and Objectives
Goal:
The aim of the evaluation is ‘to assess the relevance, effectiveness, impact, sustainability and localisation of Tearfund’s response, in order to inform future emergency responses’.
Objectives:
- Relevance - Were the types of projects implemented by the partners relevant to the needs of the communities?
- Impact - What were the positive and negative changes produced by Tearfund’s intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended?
- Sustainability - Are communities more resilient to future disasters, especially hurricanes (particularly the most vulnerable)?
- Localisation -Were our systems and procedures sufficiently responsive and flexible enough to allow localised responses? How could they be improved?
3.Methodology
The evaluation team leader is to develop a plan for the review in discussion with the programme team. This is to be agreed by the deputy Geo head prior to departure. The review approach will incorporate:
UK Based (this should be prior to departure where possible)
●Desk review of key documents prior to departure: ERC minutes, current strategy, proposals, needs assessment
●Interviews with key UK based staff and other key stakeholders: Head of ELAC, Deputy Head of ELAC, Programme Officer, Integral members
In Country:
●Carry out in-country learning review session with Haïti team
●Key informant interviews: Representatives of affected population, civil society leaders, clusters (Shelter, Cash coordination group, WASH, Protection, Food Security), local government representatives
●Selection of local partners/consortia, and ask them to arrange a visit with beneficiaries. Random selection once in a location may be possible).
○Local partners: World Concern Haïti, World Relief CEEH, FEPH
○Beneficiary consultation: interviews and/or focus groups
○Non-beneficiary consultation
●Direct observation, visits to projects and photography
Reporting:
●Sharing of emergent thoughts and initial learning with country team in Haïti before departure, including summary powerpoint of first findings
●Written evaluation report, dates for completion TBC
●Discussion of evaluation findings with Haïti team in Teddington, timing TBC
●Additional Annex: CHS Self Assessment
4.Timings
15th January to 15th February 2018 / UK based preparation: briefing, desk review and interviews etc.17th February to 4th March, including 10 days field work / Evaluation: travel to from Haïti, in-country meetings, field visits and report back initial findings to team and stakeholders
16th March 2018 / Submission of draft report and presentation to Tearfund
23rd March 2018 / Return draft report with comments
30th March 2018 / Submission of final report
Itinerary
Date / Activities / PartnersSunday 18th / Arrive in Port au Prince
Monday 19th / Field work
Tuesday 20th / Field work
Wednesday 21st / Field work
Thursday 22nd / Field work
Friday 23rd / Field work
Saturday 24th / Rest day
Sunday 25th / Rest day
Monday 26th / Field work
Tuesday 27th / Field work
Wednesday 28th / Field work
Thursday 1st March / Field work
Friday 2nd / Present preliminary findings to PAP team
Saturday 3rd / Depart Port-au-Prince
5.Evaluation Leadership and Management
●This assignment will be managed by Guy Calvert-Lee and and Jean Claude Cerin, with planning and logistical assistance from Peter Arthern (Haïti programme officer), Marc Antoine (Haïti Disaster Response Coordinator) and staff in Haïti.
●Proposed team composition (will this be led by an external/internal/peer evaluator(s) and will other Tearfund/partner staff members be part of the evaluation team.
●To whom should the lead evaluator refer to for questions, logistical and other issues as they arise?
●Person(s) responsible for practical arrangements, travel arrangements, hotels etc.
6.Stakeholders
The team shall be required to collect, analyse and report information on the views of a number of key stakeholders namely but not limited to:
●Direct beneficiaries, e.g. girls, boys, women, men, local leaders
●Indirect Beneficiaries
●Tearfund Haïti country office staff (country representative, disaster response coordinator, sectoral advisors)
●ELAC Geo-Team staff
●HST
●Govt. Departments
●Local partners:
○INGOs (World Concern Haïti, World Relief)
○NNGOs (CEEH, FEPH)
●RIHPED Members: (FOKA, FONHEP, Living Water, Micah, UEBH)
●Integral Members: World Concern Haïti, World Relief)
7.Evaluation Output
The expected outputs of the evaluation are:
●A stand-alone evaluation summary (see the Evaluation Summary Template)
●An evaluation report (see Tearfund recommended reporting format) with the following sections:
●Section 1 – Executive Summary (no more than four A4 sides)
●Section 2 – Introduction
●Section 3 – Methodology
●Section 4 – Context Analysis
●Section 5 – Project Overview
●Section 6 – Key Findings
oRelevance
oEffectiveness
oSustainability
oLocalisation of Aid
●Section 7 – Conclusions
●Section 8 – Key Insights
●Section 9 – Specific Actionable and Prioritised Recommendations
●Section 10 – Annexes (indicative)
oDraft Action Plan
oTerms of Reference for the Evaluation
oProfile of the Evaluation Team
oEvaluation Schedule
oProtocols for the Evaluation
oDocuments consulted during the Evaluation
oPersons participating in the Evaluation
oField data used during the Evaluation, including baselines
oBibliography
●A self-evaluation of the evaluation using the BOND evidence principles
8.Assessment Criteria
The following criteria are used to assess the contribution that the intervention has made to the Tearfund Outcomes and the OECD-DAC criteria. The intervention is to be assessed online using this google form as this ensures that the data is automatically captured. The form is also attached at Annex A.
OECD-DAC Criteria: The intervention is to be assessed against the DAC criteria using the following scale:
0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4Low or no visible contribution to this criteria / Some evidence of contribution to this criteria but significant improvement required / Evidence of satisfactory contribution to this criteria but requirement for continued improvement / Evidence of good contribution to this criteria but with some areas for improvement remaining / Evidence that the contribution is strong and/or exceeding that which was expected of the intervention
9.Utilisation of evaluation findings and recommendations
a)Dissemination of Findings:
The dissemination of the evaluation report and any associated risks will be discussed between the evaluation team and the ELAC responsible staff, once the draft report is written. If risks are identified, a separate version of the report may need to be written for external distribution. The ELAC Deputy Geographic Head will decide if additional sign off is needed for dissemination to particular audiences.